I am a MA/MBA candidate at the Lauder Institute and the Wharton School of Business. I focus on Russian politics, economics, and demography but also write more generally about Eastern Europe. Please note that all opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone and that I do not speak in an official capacity for Lauder, Wharton, Forbes, or any other organization.
I do my best to inject hard numbers (and flashy Excel charts) into conversations and debates that are too frequently driven by anecdotes. In addition to Forbes I've written for True/Slant, INOSMI, Salon, the National Interest, The Moscow Times, Russia Magazine, the Washington Post, and Quartz.
I frequently make pronouncements of great importance on Twitter @MarkAdomanis. Compliments? Complaints? Job offers? Please feel free to e-mail me at RussiaHand@gmail.com

Mark Knopfler! How Many Divisions Has He Got?

Over at Bloomberg Leonid Bershidsky has a post bemoaning Vladmir Putin’s comedy routine, an act that has apparently gotten so stale and unfunny that it’s rapidly turning the country into a “pariah state.” To be totally honest I’m not sure I’m qualified to determine the quality of Putin’s routine, though if you judge by the latest Levada poll, in which he has a 63% approval rate, it appears he’s not yet the Dane Cook of world politics, at least among Russians.

What I do want to comment on, though, is Bershidsky’s strange fixation on the opinions of various Western celebrities. Consider a few of the following snippets from his column:

The crackdown, which Golos head Grigory Melkonyants called a “political contract hit,” prompted the aging rocker Mark Knopfler, founder of the group Dire Straits and an Amnesty International supporter, to cancel upcoming concerts in Moscow and St. Petersburg.

“I have always loved playing in Russia and have great affection for the country and the people,” Knopfler announced on his fan site. “I hope the current climate will change soon…”

But at a time when a long list of celebrities such as Knopfler and Madonna are condemning Putin’s repressive policies, his traveling comedy show hardly helps Russia clean up its international reputation.

If you were looking back over the course of the past twenty years and trying to understand how all of the most consequential economic and political decisions were made in the halls of Western capitals, the decision to go to war in Iraq, the bailouts of the large financial institutions, the prosecution of the War on Terror, and the imposition of “expansionary austerity” in Europe, what you would absolutely never ask is “but what was Mark Knopfler’s position? What did he think?”

Western celebrities almost unanimously shouted themselves hoarse opposing the policies of George W. Bush, but it didn’t have the slightest impact because, as should be obvious, celebrities do not have any political power. They have no ability to meaningfully impact politicians, and are almost never capable of driving public opinion. If you sat down and tried to make a list of “things opposed by high-profile Western celebrities that nonetheless happened” it’d be like making a list of “miscalculations made by the Romney presidential campaign:” it would very quickly turn into a list of everything.

I’m sure Mark Knopfler is a perfectly nice and upstanding man who loves his wife, cares for his children, and is nice to his dog (or cat, or whatever other sort of pet he keeps around the house). But it should be rather obvious that his opinions on Vladimir Putin are not the slightest bit relevant to Russia’s position in the world system and that they are in no way sufficient to single-handedly turn Russia into a “pariah state.” When the subject matter is politics, particularly politics on an international level, celebrities just aren’t influential. In fact, as any reading of recent history that goes more then skin deep will immediately demonstrate, they are completely and utterly superfluous. It’s kind of surprising that the point needs to be made, but Bershidsky is hardly the first, and will certainly not be the last, person to spend a lot of time writing about the irrelevant opinions of various celebrities. “[Insert random celebrity] attacks Putin!” has been a recurring headline in Western newspapers for about 13 years now, and will almost certainly continue to be a popular one in the years ahead.

However, even if if were true that celebrities could magically influence Russia’s position in the world system, it’s not clear that they would do so in a negative way. After all, Russian oligarchs are quite fond of flying in Hollywood A-listers (and sometimes C-listers) for private parties, and the list of musicians, movie stars, and entertainers who have been willing to perform in Russia massively exceeds the list of those who have refused. This shouldn’t be surprising because the entertainment industry is, at its most basic level, driven by money, and Russia has a fairly large amount of it sloshing around these days. Unless their is a sea change in human consciousness, the number of celebrities willing to fly to Moscow for a few million dollars will continue to exceed those who refuse to do so.

Does this mean that Putin’s “act” is praiseworthy, or that it’s good that he’s managed to infuriate a few high profile entertainers? Absolutely not. If someone wants to speak out against Putin, or cancel a performance in Russia, they are more than welcome to do so. The only point I’m trying to make is that the opinions of people like Mark Knopfler simply don’t matter, and that if you want to understand anything about Russia’s likely future course you should just ignore any article that purports to explain why “Random Celebrity X’s” opinion is actually going to be the straw that broke Putin’s back.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

The problem with all these marginals exactly that they can care less about the truth and/or reality and providing a skewed and false information about real Russia and it’s political climate as soon as cash flow is uninterrupted (as much as $1.4 billion (with B) for the 1st Q of 2013 only for 450 NGOs in Russia for disinformation and organizing anti-Putin protests )

As a result , we are all observing the spectacular political failure of US State Department in foreign relationship with Russia (e.g. humiliation of H. Clinton and her statements about alleged rigged elections in Russia that turned to be completely false, humiliation with a loud but failed “reset button” campaign , about allegedly strong anti-Putin opposition in Russia that also turned to be false (opposition have at most 5% of support from Russian population etc and for completely different reasons but not ant-Putin per se).

If foreign think-tanks are actually paying all these people’s wages, and if they ever threatened to stop such payment, Russia would be wise to offer them an even higher salary to keep on doing exactly what they are doing now. Throwing sand in the decision-makers’ eyes by constantly portraying Russia as crumbling under the cruel thumb of a dictator who crushes the last gasp of individual freedom. As suffering from a terrible demographic crisis which is causing its population to melt away when the population is actually growing at a fairly brisk clip. As susceptible to an horrific overnight economic crash if the price of energy moves even one jot to the left, when in fact it has the world’s third-largst cash reserves and could easily weather an economic crisis which lasted a year or two. As over-reliant on energy revenues which are threatened by the burgeoning supply of shale gas, which is a pipe dream as shale gas play outputs typically experience production returns which fall 40% off the initial in only a year, necessitating the constant drilling of new wells to the extent the technology is not economicaly viable in its present state. As cracking down mercilessly on dissent when even English-language media outlets in Russia freely admit it pays them to be anti-Putin.

All these factors combine to present western planners with a picture of a Russia they do not need to do anything about, because it is already falling apart on its own. That, I submit, is a priceless service to the Russian state.

But Mark Knopfler has much more wider audience than you and Pat Buchanan combined! Not to mention Madonna…

Anyone who is desperately seekiing inclusion in the ranks of les gens très sérieux should be more careful when citing Russian opinion polls. In countries like Russia, which demonstratively have less than optimal freedom of everything, opinion polls are rather measuring the effectiveness of domestic active measures than an indication of public opinion.

“But Mark Knopfler has much more wider audience than you and Pat Buchanan combined! Not to mention Madonna…”

You forgot to mention Beatles and/or Abba who had “much more wider audience than you and Pat Buchanan combined!”

As for “les gens très sérieux” you just kicked yourself out of this club by your biased and unsupported by facts statement “…Russia, which demonstratively have less than optimal freedom of everything, opinion polls are rather measuring the effectiveness of domestic active measures than an indication of public opinion.”

If you add some name calling like “dictator, bloody tyrant, KGB spy ” etc you might easily join the club of an infamous anti-Putin and anti-Russian internet trolls like masha gessen, “ larussophobe”, “Kim Zigfeld” and so on and forget about “inclusion in the ranks of les gens très sérieux ” for good

Mark Adomanis is right when he said that people like Madonna and Mark Knopfler together with Russian anti-Russian immigrants has zero impact on political life in Russia and in the rest of the world.

The opinions of Mark Knopfler do matter… to himself and perhaps to many of his fans, who became aware of the Putin crackdown and intimidation of NGOs in Russia as a result of Knopfler taking a stand. And after all, that’s what this is: a man who puts his values ahead of money.

That doesn’t matter fro two reasons first Mark Knopfler and his fans is getting skewed informtion from people like Masha Gessen and Russian marginals who will say anything for money. (Masha was rewarded for her anti-Putin lies by a cozy position of a chief -editor on Radio Liberty the 70 years old CIA “roof”) Second reason is that Mark correctly emphasized – Putin and Russian people can care less about Madonna and Mark Knopfler. Entertainers loosing money , not Russian people. And tyhese two could be easily replaced by more lovable people in Russia like Italian singers .

“…George Clooney has been a vocal critic of humanitarian issues in the Sudan for several years and was even arrested earlier this year due to his activism, which generated quite a few headlines.

Could be that Putin also believes in the power of celebrity endorsements and thus granted a Russian passport to Gérard Depardieu immediately on Gigi’s request.

Would it not be some evidence for the power of celebrity has to why somebody would anybody care if Russian orchestra conductor Valery Gergiev supports Putin? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV0RJoB6hyE)

Why did the murderous henchman Ramzan Kadryov pay for celebrities like Hilary Swank, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Vanessa Mae, and Seal to participate in his 35th birthday?

“Meanwhile, Madonna’s condemnation of the Russian government’s conviction of punk band Pussy Riot brought the band’s legal plight into the mainstream media for several weeks…the American public’s awareness of these issues was enhanced by these celebrities’ awareness.”:

Do The Political Opinions Of Celebrities Matter?: http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/1012/do-the-political-opinions-of-celebrities-matter.aspx

“While these issues may not necessarily yield vote or action on the part of the American public, the result of these celebrities’ outspokenness heightened awareness of situations abroad.”

Again. They for sure cannot force Putin to change his policy (supported by Russian population, btw) As for american public – they are as well as celebrities do have a completely screwed information about Russia delivered by pocket anti-Putin “reporters” like Masha Gessen and Russian marginal opposition who will do or say anything you want for couple bucks.

The main point here is that Russians will never have the same mentality as Americans – for very many reasons (historical, geo-political, cultural etc). They might admire American culture and technical and technological achievements , but they will never ever have or even wish the western style democracy no matter what.

They will also fight to death with any attempts to pressure them. The faster US government understand this – the better off would be both countries.

Putin fell on knees before Mark Knopfler… and with tears I started begging him to arrive to Russia with a concert… PLEASE ARRIVE TO RUSSIA! ! ! U-a-aaa! U-aaa! ! ! We can’t in Russia without you… Please arrive… I will betray all Russian political interests of Russia…. only come to us.

Probably first that most people have heard of Knopfler is his cancellation, but at the end of the day, Knopfler has to make a decision about his ethics and whether or not he’ll ever play in Russia until he hears that Amnesty International doesn’t have a problem with Russia – but he shouldn’t hold his breath.

Bershidsky’s Kobzon quote that would be bigger deal if Elton John cancelled a show in Russia is interesting, given Elton and same-sex partner David’s family life. So maybe watch for cancellation of Elton John’s upcoming Moscow and Kazan shows (6-7 December) if his concerns about state of gay freedoms in Russia weighs on him more than fat gig fee (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2269318/Sir-Elton-John-David-Furnish-proudly-new-baby-son-Elijah.html).

You should have noticed the hearty laugh of Putin at the antics of the naked empty head. He said substantially the same thing as Stalin (How many divisions….): “when you talk politics one must be dressed”. Definitely he laughed also at the antics of Madonna, Pussy Riot, etc.

When this notion of negative relationship between warderobe and politics is coming from a botox junkie who is having hard times keeping his shirt on, one starts to wonder if he trusts entirely the capabilities of his divisions. You see, Pope John Paul II, without much operational support from his 1600 man strong Gardes Suisses, managed to contribute greatly to the final defeat of Stalin’s hereditary nation in the Central and Eastern Europe.

You are jocking. As to the capabilities of the divisions one must remember the little war in Georgia. Until the “rusty tanks of the ragtag army” reached the outskirts of Tbilisi the “world” was convinced that they have been routed by the “NATO trained” army of the tie-eater. They had night – vision gogles!